GRANT CONVICTED OF 8 CHARGES

But Hells Angel Found Not Guilty Under Anti-Gang Legislation

A mountain of evidence that gave the public rare insight into the
inner workings of the Hells Angels still wasn't enough to convince a
Winnipeg jury that biker Ian Grant should face legal sanctions for
participating in a criminal organization.

Grant, a full-patch member of the Manitoba chapter, dodged a legal
bullet Sunday morning when jurors found him not guilty under anti-gang
legislation that some critics feel doesn't have enough teeth and still
has never resulted in a single Manitoba conviction.

That represented the only legal victory for Grant, who was convicted
of eight other criminal charges, including drug trafficking, extortion
and possession of proceeds of crime.

Jurors returned their verdict just after 10 a.m. Sunday, having
started deliberations at 1 p.m. on Thursday.

Grant now faces the prospect of a double-digit prison sentence. Still,
the news could have been worse for him. A conviction for participating
in a criminal organization carries a maximum 14-year sentence and must
be served consecutive to any other penalty Grant receives.

His acquittal means that no one has ever been convicted of the charge
in Manitoba, despite a handful of previous tries where the case was
either dropped entirely or the charge was bartered away during plea
negotiations.

Manitoba deputy attorney general Don Slough told the Free Press his
department is satisfied with the outcome of the high-profile case,
even if the jury didn't agree with the Crown's view on the criminal
organization charge.

Slough said they're not ready to give up on the prospects of getting a
conviction against another person down the road.

"We think it can still be done. Although there was a lot of evidence
in this case suggesting the Hells Angels are a criminal organization,
the problem was connecting Grant's activities to the gang," said Slough.

"It's a narrow factual issue, but it appears they saw him more as a
freelancer."

No date has been set for Grant's sentencing, as defence lawyer Ian
Garber immediately made a motion Sunday asking Queen's Bench Justice
John Scurfield to set aside all of his client's convictions based on
evidence not allowed to be presented in court.

That motion -- which Scurfield called "unusual" -- is set for May 14
and will include evidence of other previous drug deals police agent
Franco Atanasovic made that weren't covered during the period of the
year-long police investigation.

Grant's trial was one of the longest in recent Manitoba history and
included 43 witnesses testifying over 37 days, with more than 150
revealing exhibits being filed.

It didn't take long after Sunday's verdict for the case to spill out
of the courtroom and into the political arena.

Tory Leader Hugh McFadyen, who made a gang-related campaign
announcement just two hours after Grant's fate was decided, said the
organized crime charge carries with it a huge burden of proof and
compels police to gather a great deal of evidence.

He said increasing the number of officers will aid in that. The Tories
have pledged to hire 150 more police in Winnipeg alone, and dedicate
two of six new judges to gang cases.

NDP Justice Minister Dave Chomiak was unwilling to comment on the case
as it's still before the courts. But the NDP noted that its government
is in the midst of a lobbying effort to convince Ottawa to alter the
Criminal Code.

Key among the NDP's recommendations is a clause naming specific gangs
so every trial wouldn't get bogged down proving the Hells Angels are
indeed a criminal organization.

Currently, the Crown must prove in each and every case that the Hells
Angels is a criminal organization, which requires expert testimony and
specific evidence to be called.

That didn't appear to be a problem in Grant's case, where jurors
viewed hundreds of gang photographs, minutes of board meetings, name
and phone numbers of members from around the world and even profiles
of rival gangsters.

All of the material was seized from various locations, including
Grant's house and the Hells' clubhouse in north Winnipeg.

Jurors clearly accepted the evidence gathered by Crown witness Franco
Atanasovic, whose credibility came under intense attack. That's
because the former career criminal was paid $525,000 to infiltrate the
local Hells, but admitted to lying and even stealing from his police
handlers during the sting.

Atanasovic is now in witness protection and came to court under
intense security that ended up being the subject of a mistrial motion.

Garber was irate that jurors were paraded by a wall of heavily armed
police officers who filled the downtown courthouse. Scurfield was also
upset, as the move was a direct violation of a previous court order
he'd made.

The issue is likely to be raised again now that Grant has been
convicted and the case is likely headed for the Manitoba Court of Appeal.

Grant was repeatedly caught on audio surveillance threatening violence
against Atanasovic while trying to collect a $60,000 drug debt. Grant
was also found to have marked police money used to purchase drugs
inside his safety deposit box.

Garber conceded to jurors his client has no real defence against the
proceeds of crime and extortion charges. However, Grant took issue
with the drug trafficking and criminal organization
allegations.

Garber accused police of "compromising the integrity of their
investigation" by allowing Atanasovic to run wild during the year-long
probe.

Garber told jurors they can't trust anything Atanasovic said about his
alleged dealings with Grant.

"Every time he opens his mouth, he tells a lie," he
said.

Grant was never caught actually selling drugs to Atanasovic. Instead,
drug deals involving Grant's associates were seen to go down, with
Atanasovic pointing the finger of blame towards Grant.

The Crown had urged jurors to simply follow the money trail as there
was no other explanation for how the police cash got into Grant's
hands if he wasn't the mastermind behind the drug buys.

What is Bill C-95

THE federal government introduced Bill C-95, a package of anti-gang
measures that target criminal gang activity, in 1997. The bill makes
it an indictable offence for someone to knowingly participate in a
criminal organization. This offence is punishable by up to 14 years in
prison. Critics of Bill C-95 say it goes too far, arguing it infringes
on the freedom of association guaranteed by Section 2(d) of the
Charter of Rights and Freedoms.